tendency to induce the United States to refuse any international arrangement," and (2) "Inasmuch as the existing Canadian copyright law affords protection to the copyright holder in every country which may make a treaty with Great Britain, it cannot be suggested, as it once was, that self-government in Canada on this subject would in the least impede negotiations with the United States for an international arrangement" (Hodgins, pp. 56 and 1305).

On 15th December, 1890, Sir John Thompson, in reply to a letter of the "Incorporated Society of Authors" in England, transmitted by the Colonial Secretary to the Canadian Government, forwarded a short report meeting the objections of the society to the Acts on account, (a) of the inadequacy of the provisions for the collection of the royalty, and (b) of the doubt as to whether the Act "does not purport to abolish copyright altogether, unless the person entitled thereto reprints or republishes in Canada within one month after printing or publishing elsewhere." As to the first objection, Sir John points out that detailed regulations will be made by order in council to be approved by the Colonial Office, upon the issue of the proclamation bringing the Act into force; and, as to the second objection, he denies the effect of the Act to be as stated (Hodgins, pp. 56, 57, and 58a).

In March, 1891, Lord Knutsford again requested delay pending the consideration of a new Act by Congress (Hodgins, p. 58a). In September, 1891, however, the Canadian Senate and House of Commons, in a memorial to the Queen, pressed for the measure already asked for by Sir John Thompson (Hodgins, pp. 586 and 58c). Thereupon the whole matter was referred to a committee composed of representatives of the Colonial Office, Foreign Office, Board of Trade, and Parliamentary Counsel's office. This committee prepared a lengthy report (dated 20th May, 1892), which was transmitted in June, 1892, by the Colonial Secretary to the Governor-General, with a request for further consideration of the matter, and a further report by the Canadian authorities (Hodgins, p. 1281). The further report asked for was drawn up by Sir John Thompson, and bears date 20th February, 1894.

As the latter report was intended as a refutation of the report of the Departmental Representatives, it will be convenient to consider the two reports together. And, since the American legislation of 1891 is made by the Departmental Report a rather important factor in the discussion, it may be well to consider it first.

The last mentioned report states (Hodgins, pp. 12901291, clause 44) that in March, 1891, the legislature of the United States passed an Act which gave American copyright in a book, to an author, being a citizen or a subject of a foreign state or nation, on condition that two printed copies of the book, printed from type set within the limits of the United States, must be delivered or deposited in accordance with the requirements of the Act on or before the publication of the book. Section 13 provides that the Act is only to apply to a citizen or subject of a foreign state or nation, (a) “if such foreign state or nation permits to citizens of the United States the benefit of copyright on substantially the same basis as to its own citizens," or (b) "when such foreign state or nation is a party to an international agreement which provides for reciprocity in the granting of copyright, by the terms of which agreement the United States may at its pleasure become a party to the agreement."

The existence of either of these conditions was to be determined by the President by proclamation, upon the issue of which the Act (which was to come into operation 1st July, 1892,) would apply to the foreign state in question.

On 16th June, 1891, Lord Salisbury, in answer to an inquiry by Mr. Lincoln (the United States Minister) as to the conditions for obtaining copyright prevailing throughout the British Empire, wrote as follows:

"Her Majesty's Government are advised that, under existing English law, an alien, by first publication in any part of Her Majesty's dominions, can obtain the benefit of English copyright, and that contemporaneous publication in a foreign country does not prevent the author from obtaining Eng lish copyright; that residence in some part of Her Majesty's dominions is not a necessary condition to an alien obtaining

copyright under the English copyright law (this view conflicts with the opinions of two of the Judges who decided Routledge v. Low, L. R. 3 H. L. 100); and that the law of copyright in force in all British possessions permits to citizens of the United States the benefit of copyright on substantially the same basis as to British subjects."

Accordingly, on 1st July, 1891, the President proclaimed that the subjects of Great Britain (inter alios) came within the condition of s. 13 (a), and were therefore entitled to the benefit of the United States Act.

In December, 1891, came a demand from the United States for an explanation of Canada's refusal "to admit citizens of the United States to the privilege of registration of copyright in Canada on their complying with the conditions of printing and publishing in Canada," the ground of the refusal appearing, from the letter of the Registrar of the Department of Agriculture at Ottawa, to be that the United States Act and the President's proclamation do not constitute an international copyright treaty; whereas the United States contended that the declaration of Lord Salisbury, and its acceptance by the United States Government, constituted an "international arrangement" (Hodgins, p. 1291-Report of Departmental Representatives, cl. 48).

Having reviewed the whole situation in all its multifarious details, and referred to United States legislation, as above set forth, the Report of the Departmental Representatives proceeds to consider how the Canadian Act of 1889 is consistent with (a) the arrangement with the United States, (b) the Berne Convention, and (c) Imperial legislation:

and how far the grievances which it proposes to meet are substantial, and the proposals which it embodies are satisfactory on their merits" (Report, clauses 49 et seq., Hodgins, p. 1291 et seq).

First, then, as to the complaint of the United States, the Departmental Representatives took the view that, while the Canadian contention was apparently correct, the inconsistency between the action of the Canadian authorities and Lord Salisbury's assurance, was more apparent than real, since "refusal to register under the Canadian Act appar

ently does not deprive a book first published in any part of Her Majesty's dominions (including Canada) of the copyright to which it is entitled in Canada, as well as the United Kingdom, under the Imperial Acts of 1842 and 1886" the only effect of the Canadian Act of 1875, since the Imperial Act of 1886, being to prevent the importation of unauthorized reprints under the Foreign Reprints Act. But if Canada were to withdraw from the Berne Convention (and the Act of 1886), and still more, if she were allowed to legislate contrary to the Act of 1842, "there would be not merely a formal but a substantial inconsistency between her legislation and Lord Salisbury's declaration:" (Hodgins, p. 1292, Report, clause 51) and should the Act of 1889 be assented to without alterations, there would be grounds for charging breach of faith, upon the part of Lord Salisbury, with the United States. in 1891 (Hodgins, p. 1292).

:

In answer to the above, Sir John Thompson vigorously protests against Lord Salisbury's answer to Mr. Lincoln being treated as, in any way, an agreement or undertaking that the law should never be changed, submitting "that in making that statement Lord Salisbury was merely stating what he believed to be the condition of the law of copyright at that time. He was not making any treaty or arrangement with regard to copyright." He continues: "Lord Salisbury's object was to shew Mr. Lincoln that Great Britain permitted the citizens of the United States the benefit of copyright on substantially the same basis as to her own citizens. The Canadian Government and Parliament ask for no other condition of affairs; and Lord Salisbury's statement to Mr. Lincoln will still be good, and the reasonable requirements of the United States Government will still be satisfied, if the Canadian Act of 1889 be ratified, because American holders of copyright in Great Britain will be on the same footing as British copyright holders" (Hodgins, pp. 1304-1305, Report, clauses 34-39). It is impossible, he repeats, that Lord Salisbury's statement is to be construed as a promise for all time or any time; but, he says, "if by this statement" (i.e., that any alteration in the law as stated by Lord Salisbury would amount to a breach of faith) "it is intended to be inferred

that the United States will hold at such high value the market of Canada, which they are now able to control, as to refuse copyright to British authors, if that market be not continued to them, the demand for redress on the part of Canada will be more emphatic than ever, because the inquiry will arise, whether it is proposed to place an important commercial interest of Canada at the disposal of a privileged class in Great Britain to be bartered for privileges to that class in a foreign country. It will be necessary to consider at once how long the market of Canada is to be thus controlled, and whether it is to be finally settled that Canada is to be placed at a disadvantage, as compared with other countries in her neighbourhood, because her people have retained connection with the Empire, which they have so long done from very different motives than those of self-interest" (Hodgins, p. 1307).

(2) As to the withdrawal of Canada from the Berne Convention, the Departmental Representatives, while forced to admit Canada's right to withdraw, regret such a proposal, which they view as retrogression on Canada's part. They further point out that," as the obligation and advantage under the Convention are strictly reciprocal, it consequently follows that any country which imposes an obligation to print or reprint locally as a condition of obtaining copyright in a book first published in any country of the copyright union (as is done by the Act of 1889), must withdraw from the union, such a condition being inconsistent with the terms of the Convention" (Hodgins, pp. 1287-1288, Report, clause 36); and that if the Queen, in order to comply with Canada's wish to withdraw, by order in council renders the Act of 1886 inapplicable to Canada, the author of a book first published in Canada will cease to have copyright in Great Britain or any other country of the copyright union, while "the author of a book first published in London will still, by virtue of the Imperial Acts before 1886, have copyright in Canada" (Hodgins, pp. 1291-1292).

Sir John, while asserting that further injury has been done the publishing industry of Canada by Canada's assent to the Berne Convention, considers that the fact that the